Talk:Atladaen/Archive1

A 1989 creation date for the Altaedeus MUD seems unlikely, given that no early MUD timelines mention it, and very few generic MUD engines (if any) were widely available at that time. Is there some substantiation available for this? I ask because of the ongoing controversy about the founder, Banrai, available here: http://www.livejournal.com/users/lukadia/174299.html

I did some additional reading, and there's some additional things I came across:

The WikiFur entry for Banrai states that she is 20 years old, yet founded the MUCK in 1989. Doing some simple math (2005-1989 = 16), this means that she would have to have been 4 years old when she started the MUCK. Riiiight.

I did some Googling for "altaedues mud" and came across the site twilightcollective.net, which appears to be run by Banrai. The front page of the website has an entry dated August 2nd, 2005 which states in part: After several long weeks of work, the Altaedeus.com MUD is partially built. Well... One area. :).

This seems to directly contradict the statement in the article that it's been around since 1989. --Dmuth 16:10, 7 Sep 2005 (UTC)

The Altaedeus MUD was founded in 1989 by Banrai's husband, however it did not gain teh name 'Altaedeus' until much later. The world is a post-apopalyptic mesh of cyberpunk and steampun, with elements such as genetically and mechanicallhy modified creatures, rampant chaos, and a system that forges entire world histories. --Banrai

Please do not blank the contents of talk pages as it can confuse those trying to follow a conversation. -Nidonocu - talk 04:41, 9 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I've changed the entry to reflect the updated information on the MUD's founder. I believe it would be useful to provide the earlier names of the MUD, perhaps with some details of the codebase used, since it was such a pioneering effort. We should probably also note somewhere that per the twilightcollective/altadeus.org website, it's undergone at least one purge and rebuild. Banrai, can you perhaps furnish relevant dates?:--66.209.15.234 07:53, 9 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Currently the altaedeus.org site shows it's going to be down for approximately a week, noted this in the status field. Also dug up connection information from the wayback machine's archives.:--66.209.15.234 09:00, 9 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Since all the drama surrounding the name 'Altaedeus' is being dropped, I have added a forward to the new name of the MUD project/World Project. If there are any questions, I beseach you to read this. --Banrai

Since this is the same topic, just a new name, I've moved the page here, so as to preserve the page history. Moving a page automatically puts a redirect to the new name. --GreenReaper(talk) 06:34, 9 Nov 2005 (UTC)

However, none of the things listed now in this 'discussion' reflect anything about this new project. Frankly, I propose it be removed due to that non-reflection. This project is totally different from the 'Altaedeus' project, however is the same, at the same time. The origional Altaedeus was a stolen world, and then the entire world changed, but the name remained teh same. Now the name, as well, has changed, making the last step towards breaking from the old idea. Therefore, I feel, there is no need for the discussion of the elde project to follow. Furthermore, the MUD is only a very SMALL side project with all of this. The world itself is just that. It's a world from which stories come, comics will be made, et cetra. It's teh world where all of my characters live. If you'll notice, the MUD is only mentioned at the very end, for that reason. So please, remove the discussion page, and let it start anew. --Banrai

I've recieved no response, so I've taken the liberty of removing the irrelevant information. This project is _NOT_ a MUD, it is an entire world-project. The MUD is only a small part of it. If you would like, I will create a seperate WIKI entry for the MUD itself, for justification of keeping the previous information intact. Otherwise, it simply isn't necessary. --Banrai

13 hours is a bit quick to arbitrarily remove a bit of information, don't you think? Lack of comments does not necessarily mean that it's okay to delete an entire discussion.

Be that as it may, I archived the discussion at Talk:Atladaen/Archive1 and linked to it from the bottom of this page. That will preserve the discussion, but keep off of this page. --Dmuth 00:12, 10 Nov 2005 (UTC)

I would also like to note for the record that it is a good idea to wait at least a day for replies to messages posted to the community. Many only have time or access to visit once a day, if that.

Moreover, the editing (particularly removal) of sections of talk pages is not something that should be gone about in a heavy-handed manner. When you remove entirely the signed text of people, you are removing statements of their opinions, which is usually only done by people with opposing opinions - either in the hope of stifling such opinions, or to avoid others reading them. Regardless of your true motivations, that is how it can appear. A note at the top asserting that the initial topic of the page had moved on would have been sufficient, or moving to an archive as Dmuth did with the above note.

The talk page also reflected the evolution of the actual topic. In a way, it was part of its history. Remember that WikiFur is here to record the past, not just the present.

May I ask what the "copyright registration" concerns are which prompted the removal of an entire section from this article? -- Siege 19:50, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

The concern is that information is more secure when not being posted all over the itnernet. As soon as the registration forms come back from the USPTO, the information will be replaced once again. Until that time, however, it is in our best interest to not have it posted publicly on the internet. --Banrai 10:02, 6 March, 2006